About your Search

20130416
20130424
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)
, cutting spending in the tax code, and then i think it also keeps our promises to people to seniors who worked hard their whole life and want to nothing more than a secure retirement. and to our veterans to 0 who we made promises as they donned the uniform and fought for our country. >> host: what about the issue of changed cpi. . >> guest: i start with a basic notion that social security has enci ad itbutedp our shben ttal n part of the discussion. certainly we need to be concerned about the long-term solvent sei of social security but again when retirement security is question mark for so many families. i don't think it should be on the table during this part of the discussion during the budget resolution. look at the real contributors to our deficit and debt as we try tackle those challenges. >> host: two final questions before we go to calls. callers are ready. this is another article during an intimate dinner with democratic senators. how come you were left off the list? [laughter] >> guest: i have no idea. [laughter] but i have been very pleased with the president's increase in ou
in the shadows -- republicans said they have to earn their way on that path. pay their taxes. have a job. learn english. it will not be easy. they have to earn their way. those are the basic principles that started this conversation. i think there were about money for meetings that took place as it came together to talk about all of the issues that are part of this 800 less page bill. it is not perfect, but it is a good faith, common sense approach to fixing a badly broken immigration system. there are several reasons why we are here and why i'm here. first, the american people want us to do something. the notion that we would and this process with the same broken immigration system is unacceptable. we believe that we have come up with a good approach, one that would make the country safer and more. second, i want to talk about an issue that touches my heart. that is the dream act. this is an issue which means the world to me and to many young people across this country. i want to thank my colleagues. the evening that we set aside for the dream act was a short meeting. everyone said it was time
put your finger on what we are trying to stay thougertain tax -- certairorize us some kid gets sin street and that terrorizes me because i live here. but that definition in webster has a connection to all legal definitions in that it is a political act. and generally, a political act against noncombatants. one military unit shoots another military unit. that is regular warfare. but when you intentionally attacked civilians for a political purpose, i think everybody agrees that was terrorism we have several elements here in boston. what we do not yet know is whether there was a political purpose. we are assuming there was, but we do not know they're wet -- that for a fact yet. host: someone on twitter reminds us that it was a pressure cooker believed to contain the bomb. likean see what this looks in the new york daily news. what is significant about this to you as we talk about such an easily homemade, crude instrument. guest: ball bearings, nails, pressure kircher ramallah -- pressure cooker, items you can go by this afternoon. look at what timothy mcveigh used, diesel fuel and fe
workers pay payroll taxes into a trust fund. all employers pay the same payroll tax into that trust fund and out of that trust fund comes all of the spending or part a services primarily hospital insurance spending. the age i trust funds has exceeded revenue since 2007 and what that means it is the balance of the trust fund and the assets of the trust fund have been declining and they will be totally completed sometime in the middle of the next decade. since the trust fund can't borrow if the laws are changed medicare will be unable to pay full payments for charges in the age i trust fund. it will only be able to reimburse providers 85% of what they are charging. so clearly legislative action has to be made before that he either to raise taxes or slow the growth in spending or preferably a little bit of both. i my reckoning i have completed my assignment and rather than take a gold star as i said i want to have a couple of general observations. the first when we have discussiodiscussio ends like this we should make clear what our goal this. if our goal is to moderate the growth of medica
possessed in this country? and who would pay for it? would gun owners be subject to still more fees or taxes for exercising their second amendment rights? who would have access to the so-called registry? would the public know who owns guns and who does not? who would ensure that this sensitive information is protected and not used for political purposes, and how? we do not know the answers to these questions, but we do know that such restrictions will not prevent the next tragedy. we should not start down this dangerous road. what should we do instead? i have a few suggestions. instead of undermining the second amendment, mr. president, congress should focus its attention on three areas. first, i believe that robust prosecution of violent criminals is the best deterrent for violent crime. prosecutors should punish to the fullest extent of the law individuals who misuse guns, knives or anything else to commit violent crimes. there should be no leniency, mr. president, what ever for the commission of such crimes. secondly, we should examine and address any deficiencies -- and we have them -- i
Search Results 0 to 5 of about 6 (some duplicates have been removed)